In a pathetic attempt to keep pushing the vast Russian conspiracy narrative; and trying to get out in front of growing evidence that former Obama administration, government officials, DNC and weaponized government conspired to assist Hillary Clinton’s failed 2016 presidential bid; the DNC has filed a lawsuit against the Trump campaign accusing their opposition of what they are transparently guilty of.

New York – The Democratic National Committee on Friday filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit against Russia, the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks that alleges a massive conspiracy to swing the 2016 election in favor of the president.

The complaint, filed in federal court in Manhattan, alleges that top Trump campaign officials conspired with the Kremlin to damage Hillary Clinton and help Trump by hacking the DNC’s computers and publishing stolen emails on WikiLeaks.

“No one is above the law,” reads the beginning of the DNC’s complaint, which was obtained by The Post.

“In the run-up to the 2016 election, Russia mounted a brazen attack on American Democracy. The opening salvo was a cyber attack on the DNC, carried out on American soil,” said the lawsuit, filed by lawyer Michael Eisenkraft. (link)

It’s actually a predictable strategy given the nature of the current pendulum swing and the increased likelihood multiple political operatives are about to find themselves in the investigative spotlight. By driving the political divisive narrative harder, the Democrats will attempt to say any criminal investigative findings are political.

The DNC lawsuit will most likely be dismissed as frivolous. However, in the event it is allowed the proceed the Trump campaign can stand to gain a great deal of information during the discovery phase. The Trump team respond:

[…] If this lawsuit proceeds, the Trump Campaign will be prepared to leverage the discovery process and explore the DNC’s now-secret records about the actual corruption they perpetrated to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Everything will be on the table, including:

♦How the DNC contributed to the fake dossier, using Fusion GPS along with the Clinton Campaign as the basis for the launch of a phony investigation.
♦Why the FBI was never allowed access to the DNC servers in the course of their investigation into the Clinton e-mail scandal.
♦How the DNC conspired to hand Hillary Clinton the nomination over Bernie Sanders.
♦How officials at the highest levels of the DNC colluded with the news media to influence the outcome of the DNC nomination.
♦Management decisions by Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Donna Brazile, Tom Perez, and John Podesta; their e-mails, personnel decisions, budgets, opposition research, and more. (link)

im sure the DNC is judge shopping now
if the dims get control back that judge would be the newest addition to the supreme court bench
does the DNC really believe all americans are as dumb as them and their cult ?

In regards to asking why the DNC did not grant access to their network to the FBI:

1. Crowdstrike provided FORENSIC IMAGES of the critical network devices to the FBI, which could include workstations, firewall, routers, etc. as well as servers. Comey had to know about this, but only told Congress that the FBI relied on Crowdstrike’s report. The report was not the ONLY evidence they had. The access to NSA data goes without saying.

2. The fact that the Wikileaks DNC Email database only contains 816 emails from January 1, 2015 to April 18, 2016, which amounts to an average of 1.72 emails per day is another interesting fact. We are supposed to believe that Russian intelligence thought it was intelligent to run the risk of entering and exiting the DNC network for almost a year (to quote Crowdstrike) in order to harvest 1.72 emails per month on the average has to be hallucinating. Most of those emails were junk, too, so why would the Russians bother with them and keep running the risk of detection by going back time after time to pilfer WHAT? NOTHING OF ANY INTELLIGENCE VALUE.
1.72 emails per day. Think about that awhile.

3. For several reasons, emails in the DNC suddenly spiked to 739 emails per day commencing on April 19, 2016 and finishing with the last stolen email on May 25, 2016. Some of the reasons were:

a. The recent Bit Chute video by Tracy Beanz indicates that state Democratic Party committees were concerned about the movement of donation money to Hillary for America to the DNC to State Committees, and back to the DNC and back to Hillary for America, a possible attempt at masking donations to avoid FEC rules. There is litigation involving these transactions, and emails about them began in mid-April 2016.

b. The exploding of the schemes to hose Old Man Sanders in the primaries was another prominent source of this huge spike in DNC email traffic from the 1.72 emails to 739 emails per day.

3. Why did Crowdstrike wait 36 days to contain the alleged hack of the DNC (May 5 to June 10, 2016) and allegedly just WATCH as the emails were stolen by the alleged Russian spies when all that had to be done was sever Internet access to the network until security could be reestablished.? Containing the hack is a priority under BEST PRACTICES FOR INCIDENT RESPONSE

I am still working on that. I think it means there was a retention policy at DNC. It is hard to believe that they only made 1.72 emails per day prior to April 19, when the money laundering activity triggered volume increases and the Sanders matter reheated. Seth Rich does not show up on the TO and FROM queries anywhere.

Another problem is why Russian intelligence would download the useless emails, the innocuous housekeeping and chatroom type emails. They make searches harder and downloads either longer or more frequent. All those useless emails and the Russians hung around for a YEAR, hoping for a mother lode? Doesn’t add up.

Another Deep State legal proceeding filed in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York in Manhattan.

Did the “Love Judge”, Kimba Woods, get assigned this case too? She was “randomly” assigned the Michael Cohen, and the Carter Page cases too.

Cohen is one of President Trump’s personal lawyers.

Carter Page was an FBI informant who was planted into the Trump Presidential Campaign in order to surveil Trump, his Campaign, donors, supporters, family, White House administration, and 30,000 other American citizens.

And why is John P. Carlin, former Senior Justice Department official in charge of the National Security Department (NSD) forgotten in all this?

Maybe the fools who filed this frivolous lawsuit have forgotten about Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz and the Awan Crime Family caper. For that matter, it’s about time that some of the heavy hitters like Hannity et al start covering this again. I would love to hear Joe DiGenova’s take on this.

I don’t hope for that at all. I think this is the ugliest development since Al Gore tried to win in a courtroom what he couldn’t win at the ballot box. Do we really want courts re-visiting every election, from now until forever? There’s no obvious end to the tit-for-tat this could start.

Plus, look at the behavior of Judge Kimba Wood in gratuitously “outing” Sean Hannity as one of Cohen’s clients. We hardly ever see totally innocent bystanders subjected to that sort of embarrassment for partisan political reasons. But that is exactly the sort of “jurisprudence” we can expect when lawsuits are filed in places like Manhattan.

If this lawsuit is allowed to proceed, it will end with the public being totally disgusted with judges, courts, and their role in society.

I’m not suggesting surrender. I’m just hoping that the judges have the sense to find some way to dispose of the suit.

If it is allowed to proceed, though, the episode shouldn’t end until the DNC files bankruptcy… which they aren’t that far away from. There is a famous lawsuit in the computer industry — SCO v IBM — that provides a template for how to proceed. IBM got sued by some crooks who thought they’d shake the tree, catch a couple of falling coconuts, and go away happy. IBM spent fifty times what they could have settled for to grind these guys into the dust.

I watched Molly’s Game last night. Great movie. Was interesting to see the end scenes played out in SDNY federal court with unscrupulous prosecutors. Based on a true story so seemed like an insight into what Cohen will be going through.

Julian Assange can reveal who provided the DNC emails anytime he likes. There are no US charges filed against Julian Assange so there is nothing to pardon.

Assange Is hiding out in the Ecuadoran embassy in the UK to time out the 10-year statute of limitations for sexually assaulting two women in Sweden. He needs to hide like a worm for two more years – until 2020 – to avoid facing charges in Sweden. He’s a pig. My opinion.

Julian Assange has been in the UK fighting extradition to a Sweden on RAPE charges since 2010 and is currently hiding in the Ecuadoran embassy like a slimy worm since 2012. I don’t care if the US is ‘preparing charges’ because that’s not why he’s hiding like a slug under a damp rock.

Do you seriously think Australia would extradite Assange for violation a US law that isn’t a crime in Australia? No. He’s hiding in the Ecuadoran embassy to avoid facing court in Sweden because Australia will extradite to Sweden for a rape charge. Seriously, if there is one country in the world with the fairest judicial system it’s Sweden and what Assange is doing is avoiding even being questioned because he knows he’s guilty.

No, the charges in Sweden have not been dropped. He ‘timed out’ the 5-year statute of limitations on the ‘minor offenses’ and the more serious offenses with a 10-year limitation for prosecution have been placed on hold (because a warrant cannot be served) but those charges can be re-filed at any time before they expire in 2020.

In 2020 when he had ‘timed out’ the remaining sexual assault charges, Julian Assange will be sipping pina coladas on a beach somewhere and it won’t be the Ecuadoran embassy. The US charges aren’t his concern.

As one of his victims stated:
‘The charges against Assange are, of course, not orchestrated by either the Pentagon or any one else. the responsibility for what happened to me and the other woman lies with a man who has a warped view of women and a problem with taking “no” for an answer.’

“On 19 May 2017, the Swedish prosecutors dropped their investigation into the rape accusation against Assange and applied to revoke the European arrest warrant.[17] Although free to leave the Embassy, it is likely that he would then be arrested for the criminal offence of breaching his bail conditions.[18] The London Metropolitan Police have indicated that an arrest warrant is still in force for Assange’s failure to surrender himself to his bail.[19] On 11 January 2018, it was announced that Assange had held Ecuadorian citizenship since 12 December 2017.[20]”

First, the US/UK press is not correctly explaining the Swedish legal process. The ‘investigation is discontinued’ because it is expected Assange will time-out the 10-year limitation for charges. However, at any time before the 2020 date the case can be reopened.

Second, Assange was in the UK for TWO YEARS fighting extradition to Sweden before he hid in the Ecuadorian embassy. Assange claimed that he didn’t want to go to Sweden because Sweden would extradite him to the USA. How does his claim make ANY SENSE when the fact is that the UK is more likely to extradite Assange to the USA than Sweden?

The Obama administration filed NO CHARGES against Assange. He was hiding in the Ecuadorian embassy to time-out rape charges in Sweden. It’s that simple.

Is Assange’s conspiracy theory correct? And would Sweden extradite him?

Highly doubtful. Sweden’s extradition agreement with the United States, signed in 1961 and updated in 1983, prohibits extradition on the basis of “a political offense” or “an offense connected with a political offense.” The agreement does not specify what constitutes a “political offense.” Whether the Swedish supreme court would rule to extradite Assange largely depends on what charges the secret U.S. grand jury brings against him.

If Assange is accused of espionage, Sweden most certainly would not comply, as its courts have consistently determined that espionage constitutes a political offense. For example, in 1992 Sweden refused to extradite Edward Lee Howard, the only CIA agent to defect to the Soviet Union, to the United States. Charged with espionage, Swedish courts ruled that those accusations amounted to the kind of “political offense” specified in the extradition agreement.

But that legal gray area also threatens Assange’s legal prospects. The U.S. Justice Department is surely aware of these restrictions and precedents and may instead slap Assange with a more creative set of charges — cyber crime or theft, perhaps.
He would still have some recourse under the Swedish legal system, however. When Assange first went into hiding, Foreign Policy discussed his case with UIf Wallentheim, the director of the division for criminal cases and international judicial cooperation at the Swedish Ministry of Justice. He said that Swedish courts tend to see through such ploys to circumvent Swedish extradition agreements’ exceptions. Swedish judges often examine a case’s underlying factors when making their determinations, he said.

The FBI didn’t want to look at the computers either. They already had the answer they wanted, supplied by CrowdStrike, that the Russians did it. An honest forensic examination might have come up with a different answer, which would have been inconvenient for the narrative. So they didn’t want to look.

The DNC has been unable to get leaks from the Horowitz IG small group, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, James Baker, Bill Priestap who have flipped. The crazy DNC lawsuit could be guided to depose them. Knowing what they have told the IG and John Huber would be a goldmine.